1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

UWC and FxOpen Conflict

Discussion in 'Forex Company Comparisons' started by M.Wael Alkel, Sep 22, 2010.

  1. M.Wael Alkel

    M.Wael Alkel UWCFX Representative

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2010
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    First allow me to thank Forex Peace Army for giving us the chance to answer some of the serious baseless accusations aimed at our firm and for opening the channel for civilized unbiased debate rather than one sided slander and defamation.
    The above mentioned allegations were made by a represented of FxOpen on the well-known forex forum baby pips. The forum administration how ever did not see it fit to allow us to answer these allegations but rather deleted our posts several times and sent us and warning that by answering we are advertising our firm.
    FxFrench the official representative of FxOpen made all sorts of serious accusations about our regulation and regulators and never ceased to criticize the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission CYSEC, which I can guess was too strict for them to get as it was obvious from the Cyprus address they had to fake for their firm.
    Ironically the Mauritius (African Island) Financial Services Commission FSC revoked Fxopen licenses on the 27th of May of this year and the firm remain unregulated since then.
    United World Capital is a strictly regulated forex broker our regulation beyond any doubts and I will be posting proves and registration numbers that any one is free to double check
    UWC has a compliance department which is always making sure that all company activities are within the regulations and that they are both legal and ethical.
    Cysec regulation (Cyprus) 230122 – United world Capital LTD
    FSA regulation (UK) 504862 - United World Capital Ltd
    BaFin regulation (Germany) 122692 – United World Capital Ltd
    UWC is also a member in the investor compensation fund which covers clients in case of the company failure with insurance up to 20,000 Euros per account.
    I think it is clear now how UWC is the definition of safety of the forex trader’s funds and I dare anyone to face us with a claim to defuse that backed by tangible evidence.
    Fxfrench also claimed that our CEO is the owner of some other forex brokerage companies and that all these companies are the same.
    Our CEO Mr. Sergey Mayzus is NOT a shareholder or an employee in any forex company other than UWC and I believe that could be confirmed by representatives of all other brokers in the world. He indeed was involved in Lite Forex before lunching United World Capital but he no longer has any business ties to them since the establishment of UWC. We at UWC are an independent broker offering currency trading services worldwide and competing with all other forex brokers. This information is public information and is available to anyone with google; no one is trying to hide it.
    I don’t think it reflects in any negative way on our company if our CEO a successful business man.
    FxFrench the official representative of FxOpen stated on babypips and I quote “I was asked by a babypips moderator to clarify this”.
    That is absolutely fine but wouldn’t it make more sense for baby pips to ask a representative of United World Capital to clarify issues about United World Capital rather than asking the forum representative of an unregulated competitor .
    In January of this year FxOpen stated the following address for their headquarters in their contact page on FxOpen official website (this is still stated as their address on their company profile on baby pips): 14, Loukis Akrita St., Limassol 3030, Cyprus, Tel: +357 (25) 030 250 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              +357 (25) 030 250      end_of_the_skype_highlighting
    And after seeing the above mentioned address on FXcompany website and some other companies, I decided to take a trip to that address and pay FxOpen a visit and to my shock the photo speaks for itself. The address was in fact the headquarters for Delta Quest Corporate Services.

    [​IMG]

    On the other hand I would love to send out an open invitation to anyone interested in visiting our company’s headquarters in Cyprus at the following address (we even have driving directions on our website):
    31 Ioanni Prodromou Str. United World Capital House Mesa Geitonia, 4002 Limassol Cyprus

    [​IMG]

    This is the 21st century and anyone with an internet connection can Google up all sorts of facts about Fxopen reputation as a forex broker which I am not going to discuss any further.
    However what shocked me is the level of unmoral behavior some media companies are willing to do in order to protect one of their precious advertisers. Slandering competitors is something we are used to in this industry but when things get to the point where some of the forums that are considered to be professional and neutral conspire to support such slander, it worries me deeply.
    I would like to inform everyone that Forex Peace Army have decided to allow me to publish this post knowing that we do not have or had any advertisement deals with them and I kindly ask them to fully investigate any complaints they might receive from any client of our firm in the future even if we become one of their advertisers. FPA has always been the perfect institution to protect client’s rights in an honest and straight forward brokerage service and that is why it was my first choice for publishing this.
    I invite representatives of both Fxopen and baby pips to discuss openly any claims they might have on an established broker like United World Capital.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. fxfrench

    fxfrench FXOpen AU Representative

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2008
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    1
    السلام عليكم

    I would like to address some misconceptions by Mr Wael in this thread.

    I made mention that CySec is not as strong as NFA, FSA, ASIC etc.. This is true. CySec is a minor regulator in the world.

    Yes, FXOpen is unregulated since the FSC revoked the Mauritius licence but the company is making steps to rectify the situation and is making many internal changes in order to be 100% compliant with new regulatory guidelines. The new regulators will be announced when legally expedient to do so. This is however, not the subject of this thread.

    I would disagree with the above.

    If Mr Mayzuz is no longer involved in or a shareholder of Liteforex, why does your company keep mentioning that he is in your press releases?

    LiteForex enters forex market into new 2010 in a new format

    And in Mr Mayzuz's bio on the UWCFX webpage..

    The UWC Team and Career Opportunities | United World Capital Limited | UWCFX.com

    And Mr Mayzuz owns the US registered trademark for "Liteforex"

    LITEFOREX - Trademark by Straighthold Investment Group, Inc. Road Town , - Serial Number: 78863864

    I also found this very recent (22nd September 2010) news release....

    Liteforex Traders Can Now Go Regulated With United World Capital - News Album

    First, if Liteforex and UWCFX don't have the same ownership, how is it that UWCFX is able to put a "Transfer to UWCFX" button in the Liteforex secure back office to enable clients to transfer quickly and seamlessly from Liteforex to UWCFX just by clicking said button?

    Second, in this very recent press release, it is stated quite clearly that Mr Mayzuz, President and CEO of UWCFX is "Founder and Shareholder of Liteforex".

    I would like to ask you Mr Wael, was it in any way slanderous to mention the same ownership and close relationship between Liteforex and UWCFX when this information is publicly available and is even mentioned on your own websites and press releases?

    Congratulations on finding your way to FXOpen's lawyer's office. It is correctly labelled on the fxopen website as a "legal support office" not as a company office. There is no conspiracy to be found here. Just a lawyer.

    I ask you again, where have I slandered your company?

    If you want to talk about slander, perhaps you should tell your boss Mr Mayzuz to refrain from slandering other companies publicly like here where he insanely accuses FXOpen of being a Mafia or Terrorist organisation? :shocked:

    CariGold Forum - View Single Post - Sergey Mayzus - Personal Thread. HOW-TO

    To end, no unfair or untrue allegations about UWCFX were made in Babypips forum so I fail to see the issue here or why you felt the need to bring it to the attention of FPA.

    FXOpen has no wish to start a conflict, and would like to remind Mr Mayzuz to refrain from making any more slanderous public accusations against FXOpen in return.

    We can end this now.
     
  3. Takiii

    Takiii Recruit

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    You dont have FSA regulation. ONly registration.

    UWCFX Would fail miserably in obtaining such regulation due to their 1) Marketing activity and 2) ties to known bucketshops.

    Brokers such as liteforex, instaforex, forex hunt, are most probably black listed with the FSA. And if they are not, the integrity and business model by your CEO would be enough to reject a lisence application.

    Also a simple search on FSA website states specifically that they have no jursidiction over UWCFX, infact that they are an offshore company and that if you have a complaint about UWCFX you must contact their complaints manager, as FSA has no jursidiction.

    Therefore, the biggest marketing ploy since the beginning of the automated trading robot sales scam began is your specification that you are FSA regulated.

    I'd strongly advise you, and your team, to clean up your act on false advertising and start acting professionally and not like children.

    Slinging mud at each other is ridiculous, unprofessional and what children do in a sand pit.

    This thread is created to do exactly that.

    P.S tell your boss I said hi.
     
  4. M.Wael Alkel

    M.Wael Alkel UWCFX Representative

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2010
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    And yet you couldn't get Cysec regulation. In matter of fact companies like Broco who couldn't get a Cysec regulation and had market manipulation accusations from SEC, yet they were able to keep their FSC regulations so I wonder what it took for FxOpen to do to get their FSC license revoked.
    Cysec is a very strict and serious regulator and that is visible by the big names in the industry that had huge fines or was not even able to get the regulation requirements.
    Lastly being Cysec regulated is much better than not being regulated at all, you guys might be playing poker at night with your client’s money and there will still be no legal entity to discover that.

    I hope for that to happen in my life time.

    You are free to disagree all you want but facts are facts and they are not subject to opinions. Mr. Sergy Mayzus IS NOT A SHAREHOLDER OR ANY EMPLOYEE IN ANY FOREX BROKERAGE FIRM IN THE WORLD OTHER THAN UWC.
    Representatives of any of the other forex companies should be able to confirm that for a fact.
    My company is UWC and I have never set a foot in Lite Forex or have met one of their current employees so next time you refer to a press release from Lite Forex don’t say my company, I spend 10 hours every day working hard to make UWC better than Lite Forex, FxOpen and any other company in the world that provides currency trading services.
    Mutual social events and activities between competitors is not uncommon. Let me shack your memory a little a few months back UWC tried to make contact with all forex brokers in the forex industry to raise money for the poor child with cancer Alya Grubyy who needed urgent expensive treatment, guess who was among the brokers who donated money for this charity case. FXopen. Our companies collaborated in a social non business related activity yet we are debating now.
    Company News | United World Capital Limited | UWCFX.com
    To prove my point even further please accept our invitation to UWC new year’s eve party directed to all the CEO and all other staff of FxOpen and I guarantee you your presence will be reported in the press release about the party activity (will be including some charity work too).
    Mr. Mayzus has many friends in the industry some of which are executives in other brokerage firms but that does not stop us from competing with all of them, matter in fact we are currently competing with the very company he founded one day.
    Our philosophy is to consider competitors as a business challenge not enemies. They motivate our firm to serve better services and aim for perfection.

    The fact that our CEO WAS the founder of Lite Forex is clearly stated on our website. Unlike Fxopen we are all about transparency therefore we have the legal names and bios of all of our executives with photos on our website for everyone to see. Meanwhile Fxopen has nothing about its executives on their website except for their CEO's name in initials. The simple comparison between you as an fxopen forum representative who uses a nick name and me as a UWC representative who is openly using my legal name tells you that unlike Fxopen we have nothing to hide.
    Fxopen doesn’t even have a photo of the company headquarters on the website.

    Owning a trademark is not the same as owning a company. The ownerships Some intellectual assets like like domain registrations where transferred and some are still being transferred.

    This was a part of the agreement contract with Lite Forex new shareholders. To offer Lite Forex clients to choose between a regulated broker that offers more options for the safety of funds or their current broker. It was our CEO’s term for selling the company and the new shareholders agreed.

    Again it’s mentioned on our website. It’s not a secret that we are hiding from anyone. Our CEO Mr. Sergey Mayzus is a talented, wealthy, and successful business man, He founded Lite Forex then drove it to success after that he had the vision of creating a new regulated brokerage company that focuses the most on client fund protection something that most short sighted bucketshop owners found threatening which compelled them to attack it with all the baseless lies they could come up with.

    What is slanderous is calling a leading European broker with employees from all around the world a scam broker. whats slanderous is calling us and a quarter of brokers in the forex industry one company, if all the companies you mentioned were for Mr. Mayzus then he could simply merger them into the biggest broker in the world. If you are going to make baseless acquisitions at least be reasonable because nothing hearts my intellect more than unreasonable lies that I am asked to believe by faith without one shred of evidence.

    As I said in January and before I obtained the photo your website stated that address as you headquarters in fact until yesterday it was stated as your headquarters on baby pips and I have attached a snap shot to prove it.
    Good luck to your marketing department in changing the address on the many other web resources but unfortunately they can’t erase our memories
    ;)

    [​IMG]

    Let’s look at the definition of slander: Slander is making a false statement about a legal entity that could be harmful to that entities reputation. If the statements are proven to be true, it is a complete defense to a charge of slander.
    If you feel that Mr. Mayzus has committed slander against your firm then please debate it with him the same way I am debating this with you. We are always open for discussion and I officially ask all forums which we advertise on to allow any form of debate with our company's employees neutrally and without deleting anything of their replies and I also would like to inform them that any forum who would fail in allowing free debate with us thinking that they are protecting our companies interests will not receive any advertisement renewal requests.
    I find it unfair to deceive hard working forex traders who spend hours behind if not 2 maybe 4 screens staring at charts, analyzing markets and chasing a pip here and there while risking their money and all they ever ask for is the chance to trade in a safe regulated and honest brokerage firm with untrue claims.
    I find it even more unfair to use untrue claims to harm your competitor’s reputation rather than competing with better features and services like decent business do.
    I felt the need to bring FPA’s attention into this because they have proven over and over again that they are looking after the interests of these hard working traders and keeping it as a priority above ad revenue.
    I felt the need because UWC since 2008 have not had one client complaint that was truthful and neither CySec nor any other regulatory body has even received one complain.
    Ask UWC clients all around the world if any of them asked for a withdrawal and it wasn’t processed right away. Ask them if any of them witnessed any inaccuracy in the currency quotes we have. Ask them if they ever had a trade that we closed or tampered with. Please if you are one of our clients and have had such experience then come out here and state your full name.
    We would love to end this but then many things will be revealed about Fxopen.

    Greetings Fxfrench with new fake name or simply a passing internet user.
    Well I can tell that you are indeed an active member in FPA from the one and only post you made in this forum which was on this thread.
    Let me give you a lesson in law, the twenty seven European Union member countries in addition to Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein have passed a European law by the name of MiFID Markets in Financial Instruments Directive. This law was passed to apply maximum harmonization to the regulation of financial services in all these countries and the main objective of that is to protect investor’s funds and promote competition.
    This means FSA and CySEC share the same key concepts in terms of client order handling, execution, transparency before and after the trades, authorization, regulation and passporting.
    According to MiFID once you are regulated in one of these countries (let’s say Cyprus) you can’t apply to the regulatory body of another one directly to open an office in that country (let’s say FSA in the UK) but you are rather regulated by cross border regulation by all regulatory bodies in the EU countries.
    WE ARE FSA REGULATED feel free to contact FSA to confirm.
    FSA Register
    European Commission » Internal Market &raquo Securities&raquo Investment services and regulated markets (MiFID)
    BaFin - United World Capital Ltd.
    Finantsinspektsioon - Välisriigi krediidiasutuste
    filiaalid

    Basic business card of entity
    CBFA - Beleggingsondernemingen - Lijsten
    Company register - Finansinspektionen
    List of foreign investment firms which have notified cross-border services into Norway according to MiFID article 31 (Directive 2004/39/EC) - Finanstilsynet
    http://www.banque-france.fr/fr/supervi/telechar/popetscred/psi.pdf
    Financial Supervisory Authority - Service providers that have submitted a notification
    CNMV - Empresas de servicios de inversión extranjeras en libre prestación

    Care to look for Fxopen authorization in any of these links? you don't have to because its not there.
    I hope you had a good lesson in law.
     

    Attached Files:

  5. fxfrench

    fxfrench FXOpen AU Representative

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2008
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    1
    What makes you think FXOpen ever applied for CySec membership in the first place?

    Is it a fact?

    Try this...

    Do a whois search on UWCFX

    Uwcfx.com - u Wc Fx - Forex, forex trading - Welcome To United World Capital Limited

    Administrative Contact:
    Mayzus, Sergey fivestars@gazinter.net
    United World Capital Limited
    Ioanni Prodromou Street 31
    Yioupis Tower, Block 9, 3rd Floor
    Limassol, 4002
    Cyprus
    +357.25750555 Fax -- +357.25722377

    Note Sergey's email address fivestars@gazinter.net and the fact that according to whois, there are 981 domains registered under this email address. Unfortunately I don't want to pay $1000 to see them all, but you can google the email address and see a lot of information.

    Now whois for instaforex.ru which redirects to instaforex.com

    Instaforex.ru - Insta Forex - Forex | Online Forex Trading | Currency Trading | Forex Broker

    org: Non-commercial Partnership "Koenig Online"
    phone: +7 011 2574127
    fax-no: +7 011 399298
    e-mail: fivestars@gazinter.net

    Liteforex.ru - LiteForex - forex trading forex broker forex market mt5
    Also fivestars@gazinter.net

    And a lot of other sites attached to this email, Non-commercial Partnership "Koenig Online", VirtuGroup Corporation and I don't know how many other companies in a very complicated web of Sergey Mayzus.

    Anyway, I will not spend more hours neck deep in whois and google searches. To say Mr Mayzus is not involved in any other forex or forex related businesses is untrue. Ownership of trademarks and of domain names is a very big pointer to ownership or at least part ownership of the companies involved.

    Disclaimer: I don't say it is wrong of Mr Mayzus to own so many websites and companies and I wish him good fortune in his endeavours. However for one of his employees to deny the links is disingenuous when the links to Mr Mayzus and these companies is openly public.

    If you think Takii is me, go ahead and ask FPA to investigate :)

    He is correct about FSA. You are not regulated by them. According to your FSA listing, UWC is an "EEA Authorised" company which is simply an offshore company listing giving UWC permission to operate in the UK but the FSA doesn't regulate said activity. That is left up to the home country's regulator which is CySec.

    EEA is simply a "passport" to allow UWC to operate in certain European countries, but does not imply regulate in said countries much like an EU passport allows you to travel in EU countries freely without needing a visa, but it doesn't give you citizenship of those countries.

    You have one regulator. CySec.

    .........

    As for the rest.... it is pointless for us to go in circular arguments forever not to mention a little childish.
     
  6. M.Wael Alkel

    M.Wael Alkel UWCFX Representative

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2010
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    This discussion appears to be absolutely pointless. I can't waste time explaining MiFID or the differance between owning a domain and owning a firm.

    Conclusion:

    UWC is a regulated European broker based in Cyprus, Fxopen is not regulated by any one any where and god knows where are they based.

    UWC has all the executives and shareholders names and bios listed on their website.
    Fxopen has unknown executives and shareholders. no full names or bios are stated on the website.

    UWC has known headquarters known to anyone who pays a visit to our website
    Fxopen had fake addresses for imaginary headquarters. There is still no clear address for a company headquarters till this day.

    UWC deals with clients with absolute transparency and has an outstanding reputation among all those who opened real accounts with it.
    Fxopen deals with clients mysteriously, anonymously and with a reputation that says it all.

    If you have any evidence against an outstanding regulated European broker like UWC then please ask FPA to investigate. Our door is open to everyone.
    I can't waste anymore time on this as I have other far more important things to attend to.
     
  7. fxfrench

    fxfrench FXOpen AU Representative

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2008
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm glad you agree this is a pointless discussion so to close and to answer your little jabs at us...

    1) You agree UWC is regulated by Cyprus, not the FSA as you have claimed before. Thank you. Yes FXOpen is currently not regulated but is taking steps to ensure a strong regulatory environment to protect clients after leaving Mauritius.

    2) Executive pictures and bios will soon be added to the FXOpen website as directed by our new regulator. Such information was not required before under Mauritius FSC guidelines.

    3) FXOpen has a non centralised structure but people may walk in to any of the offices listed on our website. Two new offices which have been opened in the countries of our new regulators and they will also be listed when legally expedient. FXOpen has never listed fake addresses on fxopen.com.

    4) FXOpen is always "open" and honest with our client base which is of considerable size. As a testament to our integrity, problems with clients are few and far between and are usually rectified as soon as possible and in the favour of the client.

    Also testament to our success is the fact that can weather all kinds of attacks (both legal and illegal attacks) by our competitors when they feel threatened by our superior trading environment. Our world class ECN/STP service in particular is of great concern to companies still clinging to the old fashioned Market Maker technology of yesteryear.

    While your comment about our temporary regulation issue is valid, your view of our reputation is not. Our strong growth and our drive to innovate, and improve our services for our clients has never ceased since we opened our doors as a brokerage in 2005, and we continue to be a leader for years to come.

    I wish you all the best for your company and in the spirit of competition, I hope this small debate will be the last we have to engage in.
     
    #7 fxfrench, Sep 24, 2010
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2010
  8. ilearn2t

    ilearn2t Sergeant Major

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2012
    Messages:
    702
    Likes Received:
    69
  9. joaoguitar

    joaoguitar Private

    Joined:
    May 12, 2014
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    2
    Wow, this really is a dangerous field, I mean, here they were throwing mud at each other, and some time later, appears they were both scammers... I guess you can't be careful enough...
     

Share This Page